Facebook: dissing the LawBlog is bad for business. Surely someone there reads the WSJ, perhaps even Zuckerberg.

5:31 pm November 9, 2007

Brandeis wrote:

Facebook has a "Chief Privacy Officer?" Is this the same guy whom New York AG Cuomo said was asleep at the wheel over the allegations that pedophiles were roaming that website?

5:37 pm November 9, 2007

Holmes wrote:

Here's the exact statute as found on Westlaw:

New York Civil Rights Law

§ 50. Right of privacy

"A person, firm or corporation that uses for advertising purposes, or for the purposes of trade, the name, portrait or picture of any living person without having first obtained the written consent of such person, or if a minor of his or her parent or guardian, is guilty of a misdemeanor."

6:13 pm November 9, 2007

Anon wrote:

Those who can't, become law professors. What a couple of dweebs. They don't understand Facebook, so they invoke arcane laws against it.

7:55 pm November 9, 2007

anonymou wrote:

wouldn't facebook just add a clause in the EULA or signup document that forces the user to consent to having his/her image used in advertisements? does facebook already do this?

8:05 pm November 9, 2007

ParisHotelGoddess wrote:

You losers can't sue. Only someone with celebrity can. Who cares about you anyway.

9:01 pm November 9, 2007

Karen M wrote:

I am indeed grateful to hear about this law.
What many also bring up with this topic is the changes of Terms of Service and how many of these websites state in their agreements that one agrees automatically to any changes of service by agreeing to the terms.
BUT… If I remember correctly - One party is unable to Unilaterally change the terms of a contract or service agreement without first obtaining the other parties consent before doing so.

How would anyone know when to check a website so that they are aware of any changes have been implemented? and if they don't agree with them, then what? Are they now able to Remove their information? are they able to leave that site as clean and clear as the day they went to it?

I know for a Personal fact that is not always the case. Yes, indeed, I am grateful of hearing about this law. There is a commercial site in NY, that is holding my Name and all of my comments hostage. I have NO access to any of MY information, (I am unable to View or respond to the Majority of my comments and data); Which also means that there is no ability to respond to disparaging comments regarding my professional identity. I have NO access to my forum Members. Most importantly my name is being used without my permission.

I asked them to remove, and they stated it was an inconvenience to them, but that they would be willing to “edit” several of my 8 years of posts for me, quoting their current TSA. What gives? They even are willing to EDIT my posts for me?

When I joined the network, the terms of Service was indeed not the same as it is today.. I was not aware of any changes to the TSA, was not alerted, and the only time that I became aware of the damaging consequences was after the damages were in effect.

What is really of interest is that The TSA also states that an individual is allowed to disable their account at anytime.. but, unfortunately I am not allowed the same privilege.. so, what gives??

And today, they say that they have Non Exclusive Rights to my material, Yet then say they have full exclusive rights.. Quite Ambiguous No????

Sometimes these laws may seem unfair to some, but, there are many TSA's that also attempt take away the rights of the original authors, or the individuals who want to be able to control not only their Content, but their Name as well. Should we not have that right?

Most individuals don’t realize the extent or even the problems that can occur when we randomly say Yes, I accept these agreements.

Oh, and many think we can just sue, well, if one can find an attorney who is wiling to do it, it can cost a pretty penny!
Karen M

4:59 am November 10, 2007

Ducan wrote:

Americans love the fast buck and I am sure that many parents and individuals are looking forward to suing Facebook and it's advertisers to the tune of millions if not billions of dollars. And finding a willing lawyer should not be all that hard. All it takes is one sucessful class action lawsuit and the floodgates will open...remember the cigarette company lawsuits,and pharmaceutical giant Merck just lost a jury verdict on pain killer Vioxx that will cost their company around 30 billion. Lawyers are licking their chops and New York lawyers are some of the best at winning huge settlements.

5:10 am November 10, 2007

Wu Jiang Han wrote:

Me sue too. Very good this American laws.

9:15 am November 10, 2007

Lawrence Savell wrote:

Anyone desiring further information on the interesting story behind and analysis of the NY Civil Rights Law provisions alluded to here can check out the law review article I wrote as a first year associate (a quarter-century ago -- yikes!), which has kindly been cited by several courts and commentators: "Right of Privacy--Appropriation of a Person's Name, Portrait, or Picture for Advertising or Trade Purposes Without Prior Written Consent: History and Scope in New York," 48 Albany Law Review 1-47 (1983). You can access a copy at http://www.lawrencesavell.com/pdf/albanylr.pdf.

10:27 am November 11, 2007

BTDT wrote:

If you had really wanted the gentleman as a friend, you first might have done a glowing profile of him. Not that there's anything objectionable about it, but he just might be part of a 'you scratch my back' circle, a definite mark of HLS.

Is there a cooling off period (changing your mind), when it comes to share purchasing in a company. In other words can a share holder who has bought shares, as an investment because they thought the business was a good investment paying dividends in years to come....can they change their mind and get their money back and of course cancel the shares certificate. Is there a legal right to do this.

2:22 pm January 4, 2012

wright profemur injury wrote:

I don't know how old are those who are developing facebook, but I wish they would stop changing it all the time . It really gets confusing.

About Law Blog

The Law Blog covers the legal arena’s hot cases, emerging trends and big personalities. It’s brought to you by lead writer Jacob Gershman with contributions from across The Wall Street Journal’s staff. Jacob comes here after more than half a decade covering the bare-knuckle politics of New York State. His inside-the-room reporting left him steeped in legal and regulatory issues that continue to grab headlines.

A federal judge in Manhattan rejected a bid by the conservative advocacy group Citizens United to stop New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman from requiring that charities disclose to him their major donors.

Concerns about a gender gap in the legal profession tend to focus on issues like pay, billing rates and who makes partner. A new study by the American Bar Association looks inside the federal courtroom to see who's trying cases.